Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Turnberry Corp., 81-1950

Decision Date10 November 1982
Docket NumberNo. 81-1950,81-1950
Citation423 So.2d 407
PartiesWESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, Appellant, v. TURNBERRY CORPORATION and Charles Honey, et ux., Appellees.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

C. Robert Murray, Jr., of Lane, Mitchell & Harris, P.A., Miami, for appellant.

Joseph S. Kashi of Conrad, Scherer & James, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee, Turnberry Corp.

BERANEK, Judge.

Westinghouse Electric Corporation, defendant and third party plaintiff in the trial court, appeals from the adverse summary judgment on its third party complaint against Turnberry Corporation, third party defendant, seeking indemnity in compensating one Charles Honey, a worker in the employ of Turnberry, allegedly injured as the result of the wrongful doing of Westinghouse Corporation. We reverse.

Westinghouse, a sub-contractor, entered into a written contract with Turnberry, the owner and developer of a 16-story condominium, under which Westinghouse was to supply and install elevators for the condominium project. Pursuant to a "temporary acceptance" agreement, Westinghouse installed and delivered the elevators 13 months ahead of schedule. Charles Honey was injured when one of the elevators malfunctioned. Honey brought suit against Westinghouse alleging negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability. Westinghouse filed a third party action against Turnberry claiming indemnification and contribution under the written temporary acceptance agreement. The agreement reads as follows:

We desire to have possession and use of the elevators (electric stairways) upon which you are working under contract with us, dated __________ in the building known as Turnberry Isles.

As these elevators are to be used by us prior to completion and inspection, and as we recognize that you have had no opportunity to inspect and determine the character of the work you have performed, or the condition of the elevators, in consideration of your turning them over to us in an incomplete condition we agree to operate them at our risk and expense; to provide a competent operator in the car; to use your service for maintenance including 24 hour emergency call-back service and pay you therefor $75.00 per month during temporary use of the elevator. We further assume complete responsibility for any accident to persons or property, howsoever caused, and will indemnify and save you harmless against all loss, damage, claims, liability or expense arising therefrom irrespective of whether such were due to the possession, use, operation or condition of the elevators, appurtenances or hatchways, or through failure to comply with any building laws or to any other cause.

The permission hereby granted shall not affect the terms of the contract mentioned above and may be revoked upon twenty-four hours notice in writing. Any agreement thereunder to furnish supplies or care of the elevators is not to commence until the signing of the final acceptance.

Monthly Maint to be invoiced to Turnberry Corp. at $75.00 per month.

On motion for summary judgment, the trial court determined the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Williams v. White Mountain Const. Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • 1 Febrero 1988
    ...R.R. Co. v. Famous Brands, Inc., 324 F.2d 137 (8th Cir.1963). The word "indemnity" is not required, Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Turnberry Corp., 423 So.2d 407 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1982), pet. for review denied, 434 So.2d 889 (Fla.1983), and its presence does not guarantee that an indemnity cont......
  • Federal Ins. Co. v. Western Waterproofing Co. of America
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 12 Junio 1986
    ...seeks indemnification from the subcontractor for the general contractor's negligence. Cf. Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Turnberry Corp., 423 So.2d 407 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) rev. den. 434 So.2d 889 (Fla.1983) (section 725.06 found applicable to an agreement that specifically stated in clear a......
  • National R.R. Passenger v. Rountree Transport, 00-13811.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • 1 Septiembre 2005
    ...Peoples Gas Sys., Inc. v. RSH Constructors, Inc., 563 So.2d 107, 109 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1990); see Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Turnberry Corp., 423 So.2d 407, 409 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1982) (finding agreement to deliver elevators ahead of schedule constituted "specific consideration" within the m......
  • Cuhaci & Peterson Architects, Inc. v. Huber Const. Co., 87-501
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 17 Diciembre 1987
    ...to its claim against Huber. This factor distinguishes the cases that Huber primarily relies on--Westinghouse Electric Corporation v. Turnberry Corporation, 423 So.2d 407 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), petition for review denied, 434 So.2d 889 (Fla.1983), and A-T-O, Inc. v. Garcia, 374 So.2d 533 (Fla.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Chipping away at the economic loss rule.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 73 No. 9, October 1999
    • 1 Octubre 1999
    ...is given for the indemnification or if the obligation is for a limited amount. See Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Turnberry Corp., 423 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 4th D.C.A., 1982), rev. denied, 434 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 1993); Murray H. Wright and Edward E. Nichols III, The Collision of Tort and Contracts......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT